Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Paul Bernardo & Karla Homolka

All For Love

It was all too good to be true. In 1990, Karla was engaged
to a handsome, sophisticated professional accountant with money. It was
going to be an incredible wedding: one that her family and friends would
never forget.She loved Paul very much. He was so
unique and so very wild in bed. She would do absolutely anything to keep
his love anything at all.What made this situation a
little different than most engagements is that for several years Paul
made outrageous demands on Karla and Karla, just as outrageously,
agreed to them.

Paul & Karla

Paul was very annoyed that Karla was not a virgin when
he met her. It was, therefore, from his point of view, her
responsibility to make it possible for Paul to take the virginity of
Karla's pretty younger sister Tammy without her knowledge or consent.
Once Karla accepted that logic, the rest was easy, even the idea of
videotaping the whole thing seemed to make sense to her. After all,
videotaping was a way to remember important events.Karla
worked in a veterinary clinic so she had a rudimentary knowledge of
sedatives used for animals. The trick was figuring out what and how much
to use to knock out Tammy so that Paul could rape her. Eventually, she
decided on using halothane, an anesthetic which animals inhale before
surgery.

A "Thoughtful" Rape

Book cover, Invisible Darkness

Stephen Williams in his book Unknown Darkness�describes
Karla's idea: "She had really thought this thing with Tammy through.
After all, she did not want to kill her own sister; she just wanted to
knock her out and give her to Paul for Christmas. They sedated animals
before they put them to sleep for surgery, so it should be all right to
do it to her sister. There was some risk without the proper equipment
she would have to put the halothane on a cloth and hold it over Tammy's
face but she would make sure Tammy had plenty of air and check her
breathing regularly." A truly organized rape, as only a thoughtful
sister could plan. Maybe even the most thought out and organized rape
ever.December 23, 1990, was the big day Tammy's
deflowering. Paul used his new video camcorder to take videos of Mr. and
Mrs. Homolka, their daughters, Karla, Tammy and Lori and the Christmas
decorations in the house.

Tammy Homolka

Paul plied Tammy with drinks, laced with the sedative
Halcion. The effects of the drugs and alcohol were swift and Tammy was
out cold on the couch in no time. When the other members of the
household went up to bed, Karla and Paul started to work on Tammy. Paul
held the camera on Tammy while he raped her, leaving Karla to keep the
halothane-laden rag over her sister's face. Then he ordered Karla to
make sexual advances to her sleeping sister.Suddenly
Tammy threw up. Karla wished her sister hadn't eaten before this event,
but Karla knew what to do. She did what they did in the veterinary
clinic. She held her sister upside down to try to clear her throat.The
only problem was that Tammy choked to death. Their amateur attempts to
revive her failed so they dressed her, hid their drugs and camera and
called an ambulance. The first that Tammy and Karla's parents knew of
this tragedy was when they heard the ambulance pull up to the house.
Everybody was led to believe that Tammy had died from accidentally
choking on her vomit.With Tammy no good to him anymore, Paul needed a replacement.

Jane, the Wedding Gift

Karla was obsessed with Paul's happiness. Her greatest fear
was that she would not be able to hold onto this wild and thrilling man
who was to become her husband. When he would become bored or distracted,
she would either do something to excite him or find another person for
him to get excited about. Paul harped continually that Tammy was no
longer available to him for his sexual pleasure and blamed Karla for
causing her death. Karla searched for a replacement for Tammy — someone
very young and virginal. Karla knew just the right person, a
teenager we'll call Jane, who looked very much like Karla's dead sister,
Tammy. Jane would be Karla's wedding gift to Paul.

House at 57 Bayview

Jane idolized Karla as a beautiful,
sophisticated role model and gratefully accepted Karla's invitation to
the Bernardos' new home they rented at 57 Bayview. The first evening,
Karla took Jane to dinner and spent hours talking to her and plying her
with sweet alcoholic drinks, laced with Halcion tablets. Jane passed out
and slept deeply.Once Jane was soundly asleep,
Karla called Paul over for his surprise gift. How delighted he was when
he saw how much Jane resembled Tammy. He was a bit concerned that Karla
was using the same drug that killed Tammy to subdue Jane, but Karla
convinced him that she was in control of the situation this time.Once
they undressed Jane, Paul videotaped Karla as she made sexual
overtures to the sleeping girl. Then Paul took her virginity. With that
accomplished and memorialized in the videotape, he moved on to his
favorite fun — a brutal kind of anal sex. Fortunately for Jane, she was
so drugged that she did not wake up during the whole disgusting ordeal.Karla
was left to clean the blood off the fifteen-year-old girl and put her
to bed for the night. The next morning, Jane, who was very sick to her
stomach and understandably sore, met Paul — she thought for the first
time. She had no idea what had really happened to her.While
Paul seemed very grateful for the gift of Jane's virginity and was
continually amazed at the things Karla would do for him, he was having
second thoughts about marrying her. She was, after all, getting old,
having already passed her twenty-first birthday and she was a far cry
from being the virgin for which he lusted.

A Lavish Wedding

Karla and Paul on their wedding day in the limo

Despite his concerns, he went through with it and
married Karla in a huge, lavish wedding. "Their wedding was going to be
perfect. The historic church in Niagara-on-the-Lake with the white
horses and the carriage, champagne, a sit-down dinner for one hundred
and fifty guests with veal-stuffed pheasant at Queen's Landing, no
expense spared." (Stephen Williams)Paul had
carefully controlled every detail of the wedding from Karla's $US 2,000
wedding dress to her hairstyle to the menu and to the inclusion of
"love, honor and obey" in Karla's wedding vow. He would not allow the
minister to pronounce them "husband and wife." It had to be "man and
wife."

Paul and Karla on a carriage ride

Scott Burnside & Alan Cairns wrote in Deadly Innocence:
"If it was to be a grand wedding, then people could be expected to
donate money and gifts on a similarly grand scale. Paul viewed the
entire process as a great business opportunity. 'If I spend fifty
dollars a plate, I expect to get a hundred dollars a person,' the junior
accountant proclaimed. He told them he'd set a goal of realizing
$50,000 from the wedding."

Book cover, Deadly Innocence

Interestingly, the Paul Bernardo that married Karla
that day was a very different Paul Bernardo that was born into the world
in 1964.

A Charming Little Boy

Paul Bernardo was born into an unusual family. His mother,
Marilyn, had been adopted early in life by the well-to-do Toronto lawyer
Gerald Eastman and his wife Elizabeth. Marilyn was raised in a happy,
genteel household. Her husband, Kenneth Bernardo, was the son of an
Italian immigrant and a woman of English heritage. Kenneth's father made
a very successful life in the marble and tile business, but was abusive
to his wife and children. Kenneth did not go into the family business
but became an accountant instead.
Kenneth and Marilyn married in
1960 after her father disapproved of her other suitor who did not have
the education that Eastman demanded in a son-in-law. Eventually, Kenneth
and Marilyn settled in a nice middle-class neighborhood in Scarborough
area of Toronto. The marriage did not go well and Kenneth, like his
father, was allegedly physically abusive to his wife. After giving birth
to a son and daughter, Marilyn found refuge in the arms of her previous
suitor the man without the education her father had required for his
daughter. Thus, was Paul Bernardo conceived illegitimately.
Kenneth
was very open minded about this indiscretion and, in August of 1964,
the name of Paul Bernardo was listed on the baby's birth certificate.
Kenneth had his difficulties as well. He fondled a young girl and went
to court for it. He started hanging around the neighborhood at night,
peeping into the windows of young women. But worst of all, he started to
sexually abuse his young daughter.
Marilyn put on more and more
weight. She became grotesquely obese. Signs of severe depression were
very noticeable. She stopped taking care of the home and the children
and withdrew into her own world in the basement of the house.
The
children keenly felt the effects of the mental and emotional turmoil in
the household. For a while, it looked as though Paul might have escaped
the unhappiness that the older two children had experienced. Nick Pron
in Lethal Marriage describes Paul as a friendly little boy: "He
was always happy. A young boy who smiled a lot. And he was so cute,
with his dimpled good looks and sweet smile, that many of the mothers
just wanted to pinch him on the cheek whenever they saw him. He was the
perfect child they all wanted: polite, well mannered, doing well in
school, so sweet in his Boy Scout uniform."
Later, as he grew up,
he became more involved in scouting. He worked summers as a counselor
and he was the most popular one with the children. The kids loved him
and he seemed to enjoy being with them.
The teenage girls also
adored him. He had angelic looks and a shy, pleasing demeanor. Those who
dated him in high school considered him a thoughtful and considerate
lover.
Paul was out to make something of himself. He was
intelligent, worked hard in school and held a series of responsible
after-school jobs. He had a good head for figures and the makings of a
good future businessman.

The Making of a Monster

When Paul was sixteen, he got into an argument with his mother and
she told him that her husband was not his real father and showed him a
photo of his real father. The effect on Paul was devastating. After
that, he openly mocked and taunted his mother, calling her a "slob" and a
"whore." Considering his mother's infidelity and his father's sick
sexual perversions, Paul began to hate his parents.
Paul's attitude in general and towards women in particular changed dramatically for the worse.

Paul Bernardo (no date)

In the early 1980s, Paul and his friend were recruited into the Amway business.�
Burnside and Cairns describe how deeply Paul was influenced by the
things he learned from a few of the people who recruited him. "Paul used
Amway techniques in many facets of his life, not only in sales and
business but also in personal relationships. He bought the books and
tapes of famous motivational get-rich-and-famous experts....Although
Paul didn't make much money from Amway, the philosophy he embraced from
it and other motivational mavericks justified his own crude and selfish
longings." Then his interests moved on to the style of television
evangelist Jim Bakker, which he emulated perfectly.
As he and his
friends cruised the bars every night, they spun fantastic stories about
who they were to any pretty girl that was naive enough to believe their
lies. It seemed to pay off and many willing girls spread their legs.
By
the time Paul went to college at the University of Toronto, his sexual
fantasies had developed a dark side. Forceful anal sex was his preferred
means of pleasure. Submissive women were what he sought. He had a
terrible temper and enjoyed humiliating women publicly. He began beating
up the women he dated.
He and one of his friends started
smuggling cigarettes across the US.-Canadian border while Paul was still
in college. Paul's appetite for toys, clothes and money could not be
supported by any normal job. Paul was always looking for the ultimate
scam that would pay him enormous sums of money.
When Paul
graduated from college, he got a job as a junior accountant at Price
Waterhouse. His girlfriends, sick of being tied up and beaten, were
ready to dump him. Then in October of 1987, he met the girl of his
dreams pretty, blond Karla Homolka.

The Scarborough Rapist

Karla Homolka

They became sexually obsessed with each other almost
immediately. Unlike the other girls he knew, she encouraged his sadistic
sexual behavior. "Karla, handcuffed, on her knees and begging for him,
was scratching an itch. Paul asked her what she would think if he was a
rapist. She would think it was cool. Their love deepened. He started
raping women in earnest." (Stephen Williams)
In 1987, Paul became
the "Scarborough Rapist" in the Toronto suburb in which he lived. His
pattern was usually the same. When his victim got off a bus, he would
grab her from behind and pull her to the ground. After he forced anal
sex and fellatio on her, talking to her all the time, he let her go. Two
years later, the number of his sexual assaults had climbed to eleven.
Then there was a several-month hiatus and several more rapes in 1988.
The police were striking out, although they had collected from the women
a lot of physical evidence that would help them determine if they had
the right suspect. They also had what they considered a good composite
drawing of the man who had assaulted the thirteen women. While the
police decided to share that drawing with other policemen in the region,
it was not shown to the public for a long time a decision that became
controversial.
All this time, Karla knew exactly what Paul was
doing and encouraged him. One victim even remembered seeing a woman with
the rapist with what appeared to be a video camera in her hand. The
police discounted this memory and chalked it up to hysteria on the part
of the woman who was raped.

Investigation

The police first became aware of the handiwork of Paul
Bernardo in his incarnation as the Scarborough Rapist. Detective
Constable Steve Irwin of Toronto's Metropolitan Police was deeply
involved in that particular serial rape case. There were a lot of
similarities in the stories the victims told and police were sure that
it was one man.As Stephen Williams points out,
serial rapists are fairly rare creatures. "They are invariably acting
out some kind of strange, private fantasy, so the details of their
crimes are distinctive...In the earlier assaults, the women had all just
left buses, they were accosted from behind, the guy had been rough but
he did not really 'rape' them. He had fondled them sexually, penetrating
the last one with his fingers...the descriptions of a well-groomed
young man who had good teeth and did not smell bad. The rapist talked
all the time he was assaulting his victims, and he wanted to hear
certain, specific things. All of the attacks had occurred within a short
radius of Scarborough's Guildwood Village.Just
before Christmas, 1987, one of his victim's gave a very specific
description of her rapist. He was good looking, about six feet tall,
clean-shaven and had no tattoos. Her description and the composite
picture she helped develop resulted in the exact likeness of Paul
Bernardo. But the police did not publish the photo.One
of Paul's old girlfriends, Jennifer, had gone to the police several
times about Paul regarding his brutal rape, physical abuse of her, and
his threats to do her bodily harm. There were coincidences which tied
Bernardo to the rapes that were going on at that same time: the rapist
drove a white Capri and so did Bernardo; Bernardo lived in the vicinity
of where the rapes took place. A report was filed, but nothing came of
it.Finally, in May of 1990, years after the rapes
began, the police decided to finally publish the composite picture,
which the victims had agreed upon as the likeness of their attacker.
That picture, plus the $150,000 reward, initiated a flood of tips.By
this time, Paul had quit his position with Price Waterhouse and was
living entirely on his cigarette-smuggling income. But once his former
colleagues at the accounting firm saw the newspaper picture, they
marveled at how much it resembled Paul. An employee of Paul's bank
contacted the police and reported that Bernardo looked liked the
picture. However, at this point in time, the police were inundated with
similar calls and did not have the manpower to follow up on all of them.Detective
Steve Irwin centralized all the physical evidence gathered from the
rape victims under one individual, Kim Johnston, in the forensic
laboratory. From the semen samples, she was able to determine that the
rapist was a non-secretor and his blood type factors, which put him in
12.8 percent of the male population.Eventually, a
number of Paul's acquaintances contacted the police about him and Irwin
paid Bernardo a visit. Paul did not strike Irwin as the kind of
personality to be a serial rapist, but he took a blood, saliva and hair
sample from Paul anyway. The samples, along with 230 samples from other
suspects, were handed over to Kim Johnston. Only 5 of the 230 samples
fit the blood factors of the attacker. Paul Bernardo was one of those
five. His sample was resubmitted for additional testing in April of
1992. By that time, the Scarborough Rapist had mysteriously ended his
attacks and the case did not have the urgency and priorities that it had
two years earlier when the attacks were in progress.The Scarborough Rapist samples went onto the back burner.

Moving up to Murder

After their marriage, Karla and Paul Bernardo lived in their home on Bayview in St. Catharines.� Paul had begun augmenting his income by smuggling cigarettes across �
the border and needed the stolen license plates to disguise his
frequent visits across the American-Canadian line. It was the need for a
stolen license plate that brought him into contact with his first
murder victim, Leslie Mahaffy.

Leslie Mahaffy

Leslie Mahaffy was a troubled youngster. Her strong,
independent personality seemed to be at the root of the problem, which
manifested itself in ignoring her curfews, engaging in promiscuous sex,
skipping school and even shoplifting. Her parents responded by getting
tough on Leslie when she broke the rules.On Friday,
June 14, 1991, Leslie went out for the evening with her friends and
stayed out well past her curfew. At 2 A.M., she found herself locked out
of her house. She called her girlfriend to ask her if she could spend
the night with her, but the girlfriend didn't think that her mother
would allow it at that hour. Leslie told her girlfriend that she was
going back home to wake up her parents.Leslie had
actually gone back to her home to see if there was any way to get in
without waking her parents. With the worst possible luck imaginable, she
encountered Paul Bernardo who was prowling around the neighborhood
looking for license plates to steal.He pulled a knife on Leslie Mahaffy and forced her to go in his car.Paul
took his catch home. While Karla slept, he began to videotape the
fourteen-year-old Leslie naked and blindfolded. When Karla woke up, she
was very angry that Paul had used their best champagne glasses to
entertain his new toy. Finally, Karla came around and started being the
obedient wife that Paul demanded.Paul gave Karla
elaborate instructions on how to make love to Leslie. It was the voice
of a director in an important film. Every moment had to be just perfect
for the videotape he was making. After the prelude with Karla, Paul went
in for the rough stuff, while his wife held the camera. The brute force
of his anal penetration caused Leslie to scream in pain. The rough
stuff escalated and Leslie died.On the evening June
29, 1991, a man and his wife were canoeing on Lake Gibson when they came
across a concrete block with some pieces of animal flesh encased in it.
Later, he went back to the spot and, with the help of a fisherman,
pulled out the concrete block and looked at it closely. Inside the block
was the calf and foot of a young woman.Soon, the
place was alive with cops, who found a total of five concrete blocks
that had been dumped there in the shallow water. Police theorized that
whoever dumped this body in Lake Gibson was not familiar with the area
or he would have dumped the concrete blocks over the bridge where the
deep water may have kept them a secret forever.Not
long afterwards, the torso of a young woman was found in the water. The
body parts that had been found in the concrete block had been cut from
her torso with a power saw. Leslie's distinctive braces provided the
clues to her identification.

The Second Murder?

Paul deprived of his eccentric entertainment was prone to
ill humor. This simply would not do. Karla, the ever-dutiful wife,
called Jane back into service. But Jane was far from the ideal sex
slave. First of all, the girl upset them both by refusing to let Paul
have intercourse with her (Jane thought she was still a virgin). Oral
sex was all she would agree to. Then she told her riding instructor
about Paul and the instructor told Jane's mother. The result was that
Paul and Karla had less opportunity to enjoy themselves with Jane. One
night, things got out of hand again with the halothane and Jane stopped
breathing for awhile. This scared the daylights out of Paul and Karla.Not
only that, Paul was becoming annoyed with his new wife. He questioned
her competence with the halothane. Karla was frantic. She had to do
something to put some new romance back into their relationship.For
a while, another willing girl satisfied their needs, but eventually she
moved back to Youngstown, Ohio, and the Bernardos were bereft once
again for entertainment. This always created tensions in their marriage
tensions that were unbearable to Karla.November 30,
1991, pretty and vivacious fourteen-year-old Terri Anderson
disappeared. Six months later she was found in the water at Port
Dalhousie. The medical examiner saw no evidence of foul play, despite
the difficulties of determining such factors in a body that had been in
the water for six months. The coroner ruled that her death was by
drowning, probably as a result of drinking beer and taking LSD.The
coroner's ruling was controversial in light of what had happened to
Leslie Mahaffy. Whether or not the attractive youngster was another of
Karla and Paul's victims is still not certain.

Kristen French

Kristen French

On April 16, 1992, a very popular and attractive
teenager named Kristen French was abducted from a church parking lot.
Karla had lured the pretty girl over to their car on the pretense of
asking directions. When Kristen stood by the car looking at Karla's map,
Paul forced the girl into the backseat with his knife.At
the outset, both Paul and Karla knew that Kristen would have to die.
She had clearly seen them, knew where they lived and had seen their dog.
Even so, they didn't want Kristen to figure this out, particularly
since she was bigger than Karla was and fairly strong despite her youth.Kristen,
who was a smart girl, did everything she could to cooperate with this
depraved couple and their outrageous and humiliating demands. She
believed that cooperation was her only chance for survival. The ordeal
became worse and worse. The more she cooperated, the more sadistic Paul
became. The following activity, found in Williams book, was taken from
the videotaped evidence."'I'm going to piss on you,
okay? Then I'm going to shit on you.' Paul said in a whisper... Kristen
did not move, even when he slapped her face with his semi-erect penis."'Don't make me mad. Don't make me hurt you,' he said, urging her to smile when he rubbed his groin into her face."'Don't worry, I won't piss in your face.'"Finally,
he stood over her and urinated. Then he moved. Turning his buttocks
into her face, he squatted over her face and tried to defecate on her
without success."'You're a f--king piece of shit. But I like you,' he told her. 'You look good covered in piss.'"The
indignities went on for a day or two, all meticulously captured on
video for the future enjoyment of the newlyweds. Then came the final and
worst indignity of all for Kristen French, but her death was not
captured on film.On April 30, 1992, Kristen's
remains were found in a ditch. Her naked body had not been dismembered
like Leslie's, leading the investigators to erroneously conclude that
the murders of the two teenagers were not connected.

Green Ribbon Task Force

Now that Paul and Karla were living and murdering in St.
Catharines, the police investigation was centered in the Niagara Falls
area. Superintendent Vince Bevan was in charge once the body of Leslie
Mahaffy was found. After the death of Kristen French, the Ontario
government formed the Green Ribbon Task Force. Hotlines and a base of
operations were set up just outside St. Catharines. Forensic experts of
the American FBI advised the task force.Later when
Kristen French was abducted, a woman remembered seeing a struggle going
on in a car at the scene. While she was not familiar with various makes
of cars, she thought it was a Camaro. Vince Bevan focused on tracking
the ownership of all the Camaros in the region.Meanwhile,
Bernardo's name surfaced once again from one of the many tips that
police received. Two policemen called on Paul at his 57 Bayview home.
Paul was very gracious and polite during the interview and admitted that
he had been a suspect in the Scarborough rapes because of his facial
similarities to the composite picture. The police noted that Paul was
very clean-cut and good looking, that he was intelligent and cooperative
and that his home was very clean and orderly. They also noted that he
drove a Nissan, which looked nothing like a Camaro.

Police look for the car

Nevertheless, the two policemen tried to contact
Detective Steve Irwin in Toronto to ask about the results of the inquiry
into the Scarborough Rapist. Eight days later, Irwin responded to the
message and explained that final testing of Bernardo's blood and saliva
samples had not been done. Thus, technically, Bernardo had not been
cleared as a suspect. Irwin sent the task force some information, but
neglected to send results of the interviews with friends of Paul who had
tipped off the police about him, a woman's report that Bernardo was
stalking her and the police reports filed by his former girlfriend,
Jennifer. Consequently, Bernardo was not pursued as a suspect.Incredibly
enough, in February of 1993, several years after blood samples had been
taken from Paul Bernardo, the forensic laboratory in Toronto finally
got around to analyzing his blood. The tests proved conclusively that
Bernardo had raped the three women victims from whom they had semen
samples.Had the laboratory been speedier, Paul
Bernardo would have been in jail instead of raping more women and
murdering several school girls!Despite this irony, Detective Irwin excitedly put Bernardo under surveillance.What he learned was that Bernardo had just been charged with assault in St. Catharines.The assault charges had been filed by his wife, Karla.

Two Black Eyes

Paul getting out of paddywagon

When Paul started using Karla as a punching bag
in the summer of 1992, he really compromised his future. Regardless of
the insane things that Karla put up with from Paul, physically abusing
her pushed her to the limit. But even with two black eyes and serious
bruises, she didn't leave him. In early January 1993, her parents
intervened and persuaded Karla to take refuge in the home of one of her
sister Lori's friends, whose husband was a Toronto cop. The Niagara
police were brought into the situation and took Karla to the hospital.
All of this was before the Toronto police had the forensic evidence to
convict Paul as the Scarborough Rapist.

Karla with black eyes

In early February, when the police investigation of
Paul intensified, both the Toronto police and the Ontario Green Ribbon
Task Force wanted to interview Karla. They also wanted to fingerprint
her and question her about a Mickey Mouse watch that was very similar to
Kristen French's watch.Initially, several Toronto
detectives interviewed Karla for almost five hours. By the kinds of
questions they asked, Karla understood that the police had tied together
the Scarborough rapes with the murders in St. Catharines. Karla was
understandably nervous and told her uncle that Paul was the serial
rapist and that he killed Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy.Karla
got herself a real good lawyer. As a veterinary assistant, Karla had
taken special care with the cancer-stricken Dalmation of lawyer George
Walker. Over a period of many interviews with Karla, George Walker
realized that she was not necessarily the innocent victim of Paul
Bernardo that she painted herself to be. Yet, he did not really
understand at that point just exactly what her role had been in these
crimes. Some kind of immunity would have been desirable for his client,
but he really wasn't sure what could be negotiated on her behalf in
exchange for complete cooperation.In mid-February,
Bernardo was arrested in conjunction with both the Scarborough rapes and
the murders of Mahaffy and French. Karla was shocked and afraid. She
assuaged her anxieties with large amounts of painkillers and alcohol.

Amazing Evidence

On February 19, police executed the search warrants for Paul
and Karla's house and found an amazing amount of evidence. Paul had a
written description of every one of the Scarborough rapes plus an
extensive library of books and videos on sexual deviation, pornography
and serial killers.The police also found one brief
home video that indicated that there had been more than one lascivious
person in the Bernardo household. Quite explicitly, the short video
showed Karla as an enthusiastic lesbian in sexual acts with two other
women. A week later, George Walker and Murray Segal, a plea-bargain
specialist for the attorney general, discussed the deal for Karla. Karla
would get twelve years in prison for each of the two victims, but the
sentences would be served concurrently. She would be eligible for parole
in a little over three years with good behavior. The government even
agreed to contact the parole board on Karla's behalf, pointing out to
them the importance of her testimony against Paul. Segal would do what
he could to arrange for Karla to serve out her sentence in a psychiatric
hospital instead of prison. The trial would be very brief and she would
waive her right to a preliminary hearing.In
exchange for this leniency, Karla would agree to tell the absolute truth
about her involvement in the crimes and everything she knew about them.
Karla agreed unconditionally.In early March, Karla
was checked into a psychiatric hospital for assessment. She was given
heavy doses of drugs and insisted on being given even larger doses.
Eventually, Karla got up the nerve to write an important letter to her
parents:Dear Mom, Dad and Lori,This
is the hardest letter I've ever had to write and you'll probably all
hate me once you read it. I've kept this inside myself for so long and I
just can't lie to you any more. Both Paul and I are responsible for
Tammy's death. Paul was "in love" with her and wanted to have sex with
her. He wanted me to help him. He wanted me to get sleeping pills from
work to drug her with. He threatened me and physically and emotionally
abused me when I refused. No words I can say can make you understand
what he put me through. So stupidly I agreed to do as he said. But
something maybe the combination of drugs and the food she ate that night
caused her to vomit. I tried so hard to save her. I am so sorry. But no
words I can say can bring her back I would gladly give my life for
hers. I don't expect you to ever forgive me, for I will never forgive
myself.Karla XOXO

Setting the Stage

Karla's trial in 1993

Karla's trial had a media circus atmosphere about it
when it began on June 28, 1993. Burnside and Cairns described the
defendant: "Karla sat impassively, wearing a green jacket over a one
piece green dress that seemed oversized and somehow too broad for her
slender shoulders. On her feet were black shoes with a slight heel.
Unlike her court appearance a month earlier, when she wore a
schoolgirl's tartan kilt and blazer, Karla now looked somewhat matronly.
Yet her clothes were out of place with the false eyelashes, deep-red
lipstick, and heavily caked foundation on her face. If she was matronly,
then she was a matronly Lolita."Her psychiatric
report helped set the stage for the plea-bargain deal. Dr. Malcolm, the
psychologist, concluded that Karla "knew what was happening but she felt
totally helpless and unable to act in her own defense or in anyone
else's defense. She was in my opinion paralyzed with fear and in that
state became obedient and self-serving."At the end
of the trial, the media people left, allowed only to report a few of the
details so that the jury pool that would be selected in the future for
Paul's trial would not be tainted by information they heard or read
before the trial.Expecting a public outcry over the
plea bargain, Murray Segal chose to make a statement: "Why not a greater
penalty in light of the horrendous facts? Without her, the true state
of affairs might never be known. A guilty plea is the traditional
hallmark of remorse. Her age, her lack of criminal record, the abuse and
the influence of her husband, and her somewhat secondary role were
factors. She's unlikely to re-offend."Karla left the
trial after receiving the agreed sentence and prepared herself for what
was sure to be an ordeal -- the trial of her husband, Paul Bernardo.

X-Rated Videos

﻿ The trial of Paul Bernardo was delayed for two years
after his arrest. One of the reasons for the delay was that Bernardo had
placed his first lawyer, Ken Murray, in a very difficult ethical
situation. Bernardo had given Murray the videotapes that he and Karla
had made of their adventures, believing that by doing so, they would
never get into the hands of prosecutors.

Paul Bernardo headshot in custody

However, the prosecutors knew of the videotapes from Karla and had
wiretapped Murray's conversations with Bernardo. Eventually, the
pressure increased and Murray had to do something about the videotapes
in his possession. The videotapes were turned over to the prosecutors
and Murray withdrew from the case. Veteran defense lawyer John Rosen
took his place as Bernardo's lawyer. This series of activities alone
caused a delay of one year in the start of the trial.In
May of 1995, Bernardo's trial began in Judge Patrick LeSage's courtroom
with the videotapes as critical pieces of evidence. Bernardo faced two
counts of first-degree murder, two counts of aggravated sexual assault,
two counts of forcible confinement, two counts of kidnapping, and one
count of performing an indignity on a human body.For
two years, information about the case had been sealed, although sordid
details had leaked out in the American press. Copies of newspapers were
smuggled into Canada.Prosecutor Ray Houlahan opened
the trial with a full-day story of Karla’s life as a victim of the
dominating sadist, a brain-washed, frightened accomplice to the most
degrading criminal acts.Crown prosecutor Ray Houlahan began with a segment showing Karla naked, masturbating, with the camera focused on her vagina.

Book cover: Lethal Marriage

Nick Pron in Lethal Marriage describes the
electrifying effect the video had on the courtroom: "Gasps of surprise
and disgust, perhaps even shock, along with plenty of embarrassed
giggles, could be heard throughout the courtroom as the camera lingered
on Homolka's exposed body for several minutes as she stimulated
herself... For the previous two years, ever since her arrest, Homolka's
face had been almost as well known as the prime minister's. She had been
seen on television in footage taken at her wedding, with her friends,
and at her trial. But few people in the courtroom that day were
expecting to see a triple X-rated tape, a close study of the country's
most infamous woman in a variety of sexually explicit positions."

Sex Slaves

﻿

Sketch of Bernardo in court

It seemed like an odd way for the prosecutor to
treat his star witness, however Houlahan explained that the dialog in
the videos had been scripted by Bernardo and was a good example of how
he forced his will on Karla.As more of these
videotapes of Leslie, Kristen and Jane were shown, the jury was provided
with indisputable and powerful evidence of Paul Bernardo's sexual
depravity. As if that were not enough, Karla was called to the stand to
elaborate on what the jurors had just seen and heard.

Karla with black eyes

What she described in her relationship with Paul was an
escalating theme of sexual degradation similar to what Paul had begun
with other girlfriends before he met Karla. In Karla, the willing
victim, the degradation knew no boundaries. He made her wear a dog's
"choke" collar; he inserted a wine bottle into her vagina; and he almost
strangled her to death with a wire cord to satisfy his sadistic
fantasies. Paul told her that his choke fantasy was "important to him
and it wouldn't hurt anybody." He told her that she was nothing without
him and he would call her names, like slut, bitch, and cunt.When
the defense had its turn in the courtroom, John Rosen attacked Karla's
credibility. His goal was to show that she was not the victim she
portrayed herself to be, but a willing participant in the couple's rape
and murder spree.He was, at least, successful in
showing Karla to be a morally vacuous woman with no remorse for her part
in these crimes. In particular, Kristen's murder had to be committed at
a particular time so that Karla and Paul could spend Easter dinner with
Karla's parents. Immediately after Kristen was strangled, Karla left to
blow dry her hair. If it was not immediately clear at the trial, it
became clear shortly after, that Karla had cleverly manipulated the
circumstances of her cooperation with the government to engineer one of
the worst deals that the Canadian government had ever made with a
criminal witness.Regardless of Karla's degree of
guilt or innocence and the deal she had made with the authorities, it
did not save Bernardo from the outrage that he kindled in the minds of
the jurors. On September 1, 1995, Bernardo was convicted on all the
charges against him regarding the kidnappings, rapes and murders of
Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French. He also faced trials in the death of
Tammy Homolka and the serial rapes in Scarborough. Under Canadian law,
Bernardo can apply for parole after twenty-five years in prison,
although it is unlikely that he would be successful in any parole bid.

"Deal with the Devil"

Long after the trial, one of Canada's most controversial and
notorious criminal cases continued to dominate the news. One of the
main stories concerning the case, the prosecution's 1993 deal with Karla
Homolka a 12-year prison sentence in exchange for cooperation for
testifying against her husband Paul Bernardo, who was convicted of
murder has been called a "deal with the devil," and stirred up much
indignation and public anger.

Leslie Mahaffy

As the years in prison dragged on, the hostile
relationship between Paul and Karla intensified each accusing the other
of murdering Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French.

Kristen French

As Paul Bernardo prepared for his appeal in 2000,
Karla made plans for her pending parole in 2001. Her lawyers spent much
of the intervening time trying to get approval for visits to a half-way
house but their appeals were denied.From the time
Karla Homolka came under public scrutiny for her crimes, journalists
have taken a very dim view of her, implying that she is no more than a
clever manipulator. National Post�columnist Christie Blatchford
expressed the sentiments of many Canadians about Karla when she wrote:
"In the unremittingly bleak and featureless prairie that is her mind,
she has always been a special little girl, and so, apparently, there
does she remain. I remember her licking her lips for the camera, during
one of the rapes. I remember how once this while Leslie was being
attacked in another part of the house Homolka sat upstairs in her
bedroom, reading and then drifted off to sleep. It was not that her
conscience was clear, it was that she never had one."As
1999 drew to a close, producers of the television show "Law and Order"
made plans for an episode based on the Homolka-Bernardo case. Bernardo's
lawyers expressed concerns that the television episode would jeopardize
their client's appeal, even though public opinion about Bernardo was as
bad as it was ever going to get.

Legal Manoeuvers

In February, 2000, as reported by The Toronto Star,
Paul Bernardo launched his long-awaited appeal with his legal team
accusing Justice Patrick LeSage of evidentiary and procedural mistakes
during the 1995 first-degree murder trial for the sex slayings of
Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy. The appeal also attacked Bernardo's
then-wife Karla Homolka's "deal with the devil" plea bargain agreement,
saying LeSage "failed to instruct the jury that the fact that the Crown
had agreed to accept her guilty pleas to manslaughter did not in any way
prevent the jury from being left in doubt as to whether it was Karla
Homolka who had intentionally killed the two girls."The
defense theory during the trial, which was echoed in the appeal,
proposed Homolka alone killed Mahaffy and French, so Bernardo should be
guilty of nothing more than manslaughter. The Crown's appeal response
states Homolka's testimony was "not essential to a conviction for
murder" due to the disturbing videos.The Crown
asserted that the videotapes showed Bernardo's attitude towards his
victims saying he not only brutally degraded them but also continually
demanded that they thank him and ask for more. By his behavior, recorded
on tape, he showed that he thought nothing of the two girls and would
not have hesitated to kill them."Any reasonable
person who had seen the videotapes would find it impossible to believe
that Karla Homolka would do anything to his victims without his
permission. The video footage demonstrates that Bernardo remained in
'control' at all material times and was the dominant participant in the
murders. Nevertheless, the defense argued for manslaughter on the theory
Bernardo twice suffered the great misfortune that the minute his back
was turned, Homolka, to his surprise, killed their captive. Any
suggestion that Homolka could have killed the girls on her own volition,
when considered against the video footage and the relationship depicted
therein, is incredible," the Crown stated.The
prosecution believed Homolka was "guilty as a party to first-degree
murder when Bernardo strangled them, notwithstanding her convictions for
manslaughter, which were permitted at the time when the videotapes were
still hidden from the authorities. In the alternative that even in the
unlikely event that Homolka killed the girls, Bernardo aided and abetted
a planned and deliberate murder, or was a substantial contributing
cause of murder committed in the course of sexual assault and forcible
confinement." In that role, Bernardo would also be guilty of
first-degree murder.Later in February, 2000, Federal
Court Justice, Daniele Tremblay-Lamer, rejected an attempt by news
organizations to gain access to unpublished details of Karla Homolka's
life in prison. The issue concerned a publication ban on psychiatric
assessments and other documents in Homolka's file. The documents were
part of a lawsuit which Homolka filed in November 1999 when she asked
the courts to overturn a warden's decision denying her escorted passes
from the prison in Joliette, Quebec. Homolka later withdrew her request,
which had prompted an outcry from those opposed to freeing her. Councel
for news organizations the Globe�and Mail, Thomson
Newspapers and Southam Inc. attempted to appeal a court clerk's decision
on the files' confidentiality but Justice Tremblay-Lamer refused to
hear the matter, saying the matter was closed the minute Homolka
withdrew her motion.Late the following March, Ken
Murray, Paul Bernardo's former lawyer, asked Justice Patrick Gravely to
throw out a charge that he had illegally held the killer's sex
videotapes from police, saying it took an "unreasonable" three years to
get to trial. Murray had previously held on to the tapes for 17 months
after he found them hidden in a washroom spotlight in May 1993. In his
submission, Murray blamed the delay on a 26-month preliminary hearing in
which he says his rights to a speedy-trial were unfairly impinged by
the state as it sought only to protect his client's rights without
showing any concern for his own.

No New Trial

On March 27, 2000, the Toronto Star�reported that an
Ontario appeals court had rejected Paul Bernardo's bid for a new trial.
The panel of three justices took just fifteen minutes to make their
ruling after hearing four hours of arguments by Bernardo's lawyers.
Funded by legal aid, Bernardo was appealing his 1995 convictions for
raping and murdering Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French. The decision was
so quick that the Crown wasn't even asked to rebut the points of
Bernardo's appeal before the justices rejected it.Lawyers
for the French and Mahaffy families said the decision effectively
blocks Bernardo from any future appeals, as he doesn't appear to have
any issues that would justify further action.The
basis of Bernardo's appeal was that, in his counsel's opinion, Judge
Patrick LeSage shouldn't have allowed evidence of Bernardo's use of a
ligature during sex with an unnamed woman in 1986.They also argued that
expert testimony on battered-wife syndrome relating to Karla Homolka
should not have been allowed.Homolka's successful
plea-bargaining also became an issue as Bernardo's legal team argued
that it shouldn't have been admitted as evidence in the previous trial
because it prejudiced the jury. The final point of appeal was that Judge
LeSage's final instructions confused the jury's understanding of
reasonable doubt and the burden of proof.Justice
Michael Moldaver said it was clear Bernardo and Homolka were both
participants in the murders in some way. He said if the incriminating
videotapes depicting the couple's rape and torture sessions were found
before Homolka's plea bargain, she too would have been found guilty of
first-degree murder.After the hearing Bernardo's lawyers said their client may consider appealing his conviction to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Lawyers Rape Tape Case

In April, 2000, according to a further report in the Toronto Star,
during his trial on charges of obstructing justice, Paul Bernardo's
former lawyer, Ken Murray, tabled a handwritten note he had received
from Bernardo which warned him that the videos depicting the rape and
torture of two teenage victims "may first appear to be irrelevant." The
two-page letter, which also included a sketch of where the videos were
hidden in a secret hiding place in a ceiling light in the bathroom of
the home he shared with Karla Homolka also warned Murray not to view the
gruesome tapes. "Although we will have to go through them in the
future," the letter said, "at this time, I instruct you not to view
them." According to another court document, Bernardo gave Murray the
go-ahead just twelve days after the tapes were retrieved but there was
no indication in the documents if Murray followed his client's orders at
that time. Those instructions set off a three-year legal battle for
Murray, who was charged after he withheld the tapes because Bernardo
said they would be necessary for his defense.After
Bernardo was charged in May 1993 with the first-degree murder of Kristen
French and Leslie Mahaffy, he wrote the note leading Murray to the
tapes police had missed in a three-month search of the couple's home in
Port Dalhousie, a suburb of St. Catharines, Ontario. In the note,
Bernardo instructed Murray to use the code words "how about those Jays"
if successful in finding the tapes and "how about those Leafs" if
unsuccessful. The note ends with the comments "good luck" and "God
bless."Seventeen months after Murray received the
tapes, he handed them in to the authorities and resigned from the case. A
judicial inquiry later found that if the Crown had been in possession
of the tapes, Homolka's plea bargain, made in exchange for testimony
against her ex-husband, would not have been necessary.Murray's
lawyer asked the court for permission to use his client's letters and
discussions with Bernardo so he could properly defend his client. Tony
Bryant, Bernardo's new lawyer, argued that making those communications
public would jeopardize Bernardo's planned appeal to the Supreme Court
of Canada. Justice Patrick Gravely later ruled that Murray's right to
defend himself far outweighed Bernardo's right to solicitor-client
privilege.On April 13, 2000, the Star�further
reported that during Ken Murray's trial on charges of obstructing
justice, Paul Bernardo's murder trial lawyer, John Rosen, testified that
Murray hadn't told him that he had Bernardo's rape videos when he asked
him to take over the case in August 1994. He also stated that Carolyn
MacDonald, Murray's junior counsel, hadn't mentioned the videos during a
discussion in which she criticized Murray's handling of the case. Rosen
insisted that even when he was formally hired as Bernardo's new lawyer
at the Niagara Detention Center in August 1994, during a three-way chat
between himself, Murray and Bernardo, the tapes weren't mentioned.The
prosecution argued that Murray attempted to obstruct justice by hiding
the tapes for 17 months after retrieving them from Bernardo's homeRosen
later testified that when he first saw Bernardo's rape videos he felt
an "ethical obligation" to give them to police. "I was stunned by what I
saw," Rosen said, recalling his first viewing of the videos in
September 1994. He said it was clear in his first viewing of the videos
that they showed "direct evidence" that Bernardo was guilty of the
abduction, unlawful confinement and aggravated sexual assault of French
and Mahaffy."There was no evidence of any killing,
but clearly these girls were killed and he is a party to homicide,"
Rosen said. While he said he saw no option but to hand the tapes over to
prosecutors, he first tried to use them as leverage to plea-bargain
Bernardo a second-degree murder conviction and a chance of parole after
15 years. He testified that he told high-ranking government prosecutors
that a first-degree murder trial would be "dreadful" and "devastating"
to the victims families and "humiliating to the memory of their
children." He said prosecutors had a good idea of what evidence had been
passed to him by Murray and he warned them if "a picture's worth a
thousand words then start multiplying it."

"Black Widow" Defense

Several days later, Murray testified that he had felt a duty to
Bernardo to retrieve, keep and use Bernardo's rape videos in support of a
defense theory that Karla Homolka was a "black widow" killer. Murray
described how his defense team had formulated the "black widow defense"
for Bernardo in the French-Mahaffy sex slayings before they had seen the
videos. He told the court that once he had seen the videos, he regarded
Homolka as vastly different from the portrait of a coerced, manipulated
and abused victim that she painted for prosecutors in her
plea-bargaining, he said. All the videos, Murray said, were consistent
with Bernardo's allegations that Homolka was "a liar" and very likely a
killer.
Murray later described how he quit as Paul Bernardo's
lawyer when Bernardo plotted to lie on the stand and told him to
suppress the rape videos. Murray testified that Bernardo told him that
he would testify that he had "no contact" at all with murdered
schoolgirls Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy. Bernardo reasoned it was
his word against Karla Homolka's. When Murray challenged Bernardo,
saying he would not allow the perjury because the rape tapes showed he
had been with the murdered girls, Bernardo said he would lie anyway. "He
was telling me he was going to lie on the stand and he was asking me to
be complicit ... asking me to hold back evidence that showed he was
lying."
"I said you're not going to do it. You're not going to get up there and lie ... I'm not supporting perjury."
As
Murray's trial continued, some amazing insights into the minds of
Bernardo and Homolka surfaced. At one point, Murray told the court that,
soon after Kristen French's murder, Karla Homolka had sought a
spiritualist's advice on how to exorcise the noises, bangs and voices
that were coming from the basement where Leslie Mahaffy's body had been
dismembered. The description of this and other events was contained in a
thousand plus pages of transcript taken from Homolka's pre-trial
interviews with Murray and his junior counsel at the Prison for Women
where Homolka was being held in May 1994. The transcripts were released
during Murray's trial. Unaware that the two teens had been murdered in
Homolka's home, St. Catharines psychic Lori Disenthio advised her to
pour ammonia down every drain and "ask the spirits to leave". She also
told Homolka to keep an amethyst stone in her pocket to "absorb all the
bad" around her.
Homolka states in the interview, "I didn't fully believe it, but I was ready to try anything."
She went on to describe that the spiritual advice eliminated the noises and voices for a while, but they eventually returned.
Later
in April, as Murray's trial continued, a detailed transcription of the
"rape videos" was read to the court. One of the most damning scenes is
when the supposedly innocent Homolka is described as reaching for a dark
green bottle known to contain the animal tranquillizer Halothane and,
after soaking a rag with it, holds it to Jane Doe's mouth and nose. She
then smiles, waves, blows kisses and licks her lips for the camera
before sexually assaulting the girl and sitting naked on her.
This
scene and others was detailed to the court in an attempt to strengthen
Ken Murray's assertion that he kept Paul Bernardo's rape videos from
prosecutors because they suggested Homolka was as likely as Bernardo to
be a schoolgirl killer. Reading from a frame-by-frame and word-by-word
police transcript of the chilling videos, Murray's lawyer, Austin
Cooper, laid out details of the sinister rape of unconscious schoolgirl
known only as Jane Doe, which had been previously shrouded in secrecy.
Cooper's reading of that section of the video went far beyond the scant
audio portions revealed at Bernardo's trial.
Cooper also read
details of the couple's fatal drug rape of Tammy Homolka, Karla's
15-year-old sister on Christmas Eve, 1990, which she and Bernardo
videotaped. Other footage, shot just two weeks after Tammy's murder,
clearly shows Homolka pretending to be her dead sister while having sex
with Bernardo.
The sections of the transcript depicting the rapes
of French and Mahaffy was not read into the court record as they were
protected by a publication ban which prohibited the reporting of any
details but even without it, the details that were read cast a dark pall
over court. The mothers of French and Mahaffy, who had previously been
in attendance during the trial, left the courtroom as the reading began.
At
one stage the gravity of what he was reading took its toll on Austin
Cooper and he broke down in mid-sentence, asked for a break and was
visibly choked with emotion as he left the courtroom. Superior Court
Justice Patrick Gravely was also shaken by what he had heard and ordered
an early lunch recess and an extended afternoon break.
Even
case-hardened journalists who had previously seen or heard the tapes at
Bernardo's trial five years before left the room or stopped taking notes
to bury their heads in their hands.
Early in May, 2000, Karla
Homolka's bid to gain prison passes to attend a halfway house in
Montreal received a boost when a taxpayer-funded women's group lent its
support to her campaign. The Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry
Societies, which operates on a federal subsidy, not only supported her
application but also wished Homolka "every success" in her Federal Court
bid to overturn a warden's denial of escorted passes to a
CAEFS-operated Montreal halfway house. Hearing of the groups support,
Tim Danson, lawyer for the parents of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy,
suggested CAEFS was either "terribly ill-informed" about Homolka or was
"not qualified" to assess her case.
Danson had previously asked
that Homolka not be released on parole in July 2001 but should instead
go before the National Parole Board as a dangerous inmate who should be
held for the full 12-year sentence.
Homolka sought Federal Court
relief in 1999 after Joliette warden Marie-Andree Cyrenne refused her
bid for a series of escorted passes to the Maison Therese-Casgrain, a
Montreal halfway house operated by the Elizabeth Fry Society of Quebec.
Homolka's original bid was bolstered by psychiatric and psychological
reports from her 1993 trial, which portray Homolka as an abused victim
of Bernardo. Psychological reports filed in response by Joliette prison
were deemed confidential and could not be published.
One reason
for Homolka's bid to attend the safe house is that her girlfriend, Lynda
Veronneau, was previously paroled from Joliette prison two years into a
four-year term for leading a passive ex-girlfriend on a string of
robberies. Veronneau had previously kept Homolka's true identity from
her family by referring to her simply as "Jessica" telling them that she
was deeply in love with her and planned to live with her when Homolka
was released.
In June, 2000, the Toronto Star reported that seven
years after he first became involved in the Bernardo Homolka saga, Ken
Murray was acquitted of obstruction of justice.
In an interview,
after the court's decision, Murray suggested that, even though he was
happy with the court's ruling, he may never be able to shake the stigma
of being the man who attempted to protect Canada's most reviled sex
killer, and inadvertently his then-wife, Karla Homolka. "There's a
saying among prosecutors that, if you can't convict them, at least you
can ruin their lives," Murray said, "but, unfortunately, that's what
they did to me."

--Party Girl--

Joliette Prison

While Joliette prison authorities were reviewing Karla
Homolka's prison conduct to see if she should be kept in prison for
another four years, a Montreal newspaper published a series of party
photos of the killer. Several of the photos showed Homolka and fellow
inmate, Christina Sherry, convicted for her role in a Montreal rape and
torture case, modeling black cocktail dresses for other inmates at a
birthday party. The former inmate who sold the pictures to the newspaper
described Joliette as an "adult daycare center that pampered inmates."
At the time the photos were taken, Christina Sherry was serving a
five-year sentence that began in April,� 1997 after
pleading guilty to kidnapping, forcible confinement, sexual assault and
sexual assault causing bodily harm. Also seen in the photos was Tracy
Gonzales, Sherry's accomplice, who was sentenced to less than eight
years.
Ironically, Sherry and Gonzales were convicted for luring
girls to a Montreal apartment where they were tortured, sexually
assaulted and forced to be the sex slaves of James Medley, who was
convicted of the crimes, sentenced to 26 years and labeled a dangerous
offender.
In the wake of the unfavorable publicity that Karla
Homolka's "party girl" photos had caused, Homolka was advised that she
would be moved to the Regional Psychiatric Center at maximum-security
Saskatchewan Penitentiary to undergo a 45-to-60 day "psychiatric
assessment." In response, Homolka was reported as having "kicked and
screamed" in protest. The transfer was seen by some as a sure sign that
her Joliette handlers were going to recommend she be detained in prison
for another four years.
Lucie McClung, the newly appointed head of
Correctional Services Canada, ordered the transfer at Joliette Prison's
request after a prominent psychologist recommended it.
Unlike
Joliette, the Saskatoon facility is surrounded by electronic wire fences
and armed guards, and is definitely maximum-security. The concrete
cells are 7.1 square meters with a stainless steel toilet and sink. Beds
are bolted to the floor. There is one window with horizontal slats that
act as bars.
In a November, 2000 story, the Toronto Star
described how, following her transfer to Saskatoon's Regional
Psychiatric Center in October, Karla Homolka refused to co-operate with
doctors as an act of defiance. Although she co-operated with
psychologists, she refused to participate in any psychiatric testing.
Homolka's stand meant Correctional Services Canada had little choice but
to recommend her detention for a further four years.

Party Girl

End of the Road
As Karla Homolka was attempting to
play down her "party girl" image, her former partner-in-crime, Paul
Bernardo, lost out in his second appeal for a new trial. The high court
did not give reasons for refusing to hear the appeal after Bernardo's
lawyers had sought leave to appeal on the grounds that Judge Patrick
LeSage erred at Bernardo's 1995 trial.
Bernardo's Toronto lawyer,
Tony Bryant, said the dismissal virtually ends his client's legal
recourse. "I believe that it exhausts all our options," he said.
The
decision means that Bernardo, who is classified as a dangerous
offender, will never be released from prison. Tim Danson, lawyer for the
French and Mahaffy families, said there was great relief at the Supreme
Court decision. "There is significant relief on behalf of the
families," said Danson. He said the families knew that it was a long
shot that the Supreme Court would overturn Bernardo's conviction, but he
added that after "all that has happened," they take nothing for
granted.
In contrast to Homolka's former living conditions, Paul
Bernardo is housed in one of Canada's toughest maximum-security
environments. He is locked up for 23 hours a day leaving no time for
birthday cakes or dress-up parties simply because there is no
opportunity for him to mingle with the other inmates. The prison,
Kingston Penitentiary, is Canada's oldest and largest maximum-security
institution, a foreboding place that conjures up images of the classic
turn-of-the-century insane asylum. Often, in the various segregation
units, called ranges, anguished cries of prisoners desperate for human
contact can be heard echoing down the hallways as prisoners peer out of
their cells hoping to catch a glimpse of visitors.
Kingston,
considered by many in the department to be the "bottom of the barrel,"
is a difficult facility to run as many inmates have special mental or
physical health needs and must be segregated from the general
population. Bernardo lives in a tiny cell not much larger than the
average domestic bathroom, equipped with a cot, desk and toilet.
A
small outdoor yard off the range allows segregated prisoners to step
outside for an hour of fresh air each day, which they can spend with
other specific inmates, depending on their status. It is unknown what
status Paul Bernardo currently enjoys.
In November, 2000 the Law
Society of Upper Canada dropped a professional misconduct charge against
lawyer Ken Murray putting an end to the ongoing sex-and-torture
videotape furor. In addition, the society announced that it plans to
draft new rules to govern how its members should handle incriminating
evidence that might be beneficial to both sides.
Also in November,
crown officials abandoned efforts to prosecute author Stephen Williams
for allegedly viewing sex killer Paul Bernardo's notorious
sex-and-torture videotapes. Williams was previously charged with
disobeying a court order after detectives concluded that 27 passages in
his book, Invisible Darkness, were so detailed that Williams had to have seen the restricted tapes.

"Death Threats"

In December 2000, Karla Homolka's lawyer told the media that
his client feared being killed by vigilantes�when she is freed from
prison. With Corrections Canada poised to ask that Homolka be detained
for her full 12-year sentence on grounds she'll kill again, lawyer Marc
Labelle said Homolka was petrified that she'd be murdered. Labelle said
Homolka had not only received further threats from within the prison
system, but she had also been targeted for death on chat groups that his
legal assistants uncovered on the Internet.
"I haven't seen these
sites myself, but I'm told there are numerous sites where threats are
made that 'we'll kill you if you get out.'" Labelle said the only place
Homolka felt safe was in Joliette prison.
As 2000 drew to a close,
Manitoba's justice minister announced that he would urge officials in
Winnipeg to withhold the permits necessary for a Toronto filmmaker
trying to shoot a movie about murderers Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka.
"This film won't get any help from us," Gord Mackintosh said. "I think
it's important that there be an early message back to the filmmakers
that we don't back their plans."
Peter Simpson, chairman of
Norstar Filmed Entertainment Inc., the producers of the proposed film,
said that his company might have to shoot the film outside Ontario
because of the province's opposition. "If they really would rather I
take the movie, spend the money and go shoot the movie and fake it in
Montreal, I might be talked into that," Simpson said. "I'm sure that
Quebec and Winnipeg would both welcome it with open arms -- and I'd get
more money out of there." Simpson made the comments after Ontario
Culture Minister Helen Johns and Premier Mike Harris said they would not
co-operate with the making of the film, including keeping Simpson from
using government buildings or giving him provincial tax credits.
Telefilm Canada has also denied Norstar's request for funding.
The film is based on the book Invisible Darkness
by Stephen Williams, which contains gory details about the rapes of
more than a dozen women, culminating in the torture and murder of two
teenagers.
In February 2001, the Toronto Star reported that
Karla Homolka's safety had became a growing concern for her lawyer
after he was made aware of an Internet death pool that allegedly took
bets on when Homolka would be killed.
At the time, Homolka was
housed at the Pinel Institute, a psychiatric hospital in Montreal after
being transferred there in early February for a treatment program after
she spent more than two months under psychiatric evaluation in
Saskatoon.
According to her lawyer, Homolka has discovered at
least two or three Web sites that contain threats against her, including
the betting pool. One site is called "Karla Homolka Death Pool: When
the Game is Over, We All Win." While the site states clearly it does not
condone violence against Homolka, it solicits bets on the exact day she
will die. The rules state players are not allowed to fix the bet by
killing her themselves or having someone else do it. Homolka, who is
using the alias Karla Teale while in prison, is taking the threats
seriously.
The threats came at a time when two out of three
psychiatrists had recommended that Homolka is still too dangerous to be
released forcing corrections officials to make recommendations to the
National Parole Board to keep her in prison until her sentence expires
in 2005. Homolka's lawyer said that Homolka still wants to return to
Joliette prison and stay there for the rest of her term. Labelle said
Homolka feels it's the only place in Canada where she won't be murdered.
He said she also intends to waive opposition to her detention hearing.
Prior
to Homolka's transfer to Pinel, corrections officials had told Labelle
that his client would go to St. Anne-des-Plaines maximum-security
prison, one of the most notorious federal institutions in Quebec.
Labelle suggested that Homolka will almost certainly launch a federal
court challenge if she is sent anywhere but Joliette.

Staying Put

Karla Homolka in court

On March 8, 2001, Karla Homolka was officially denied early
statutory release. The National Parole Board released its ruling after a
review of the case, ordering that Homolka remain detained past her July
release eligibility date. ''The board is satisfied that, if released,
you are likely to commit an offence causing the death of or serious harm
to another person before the expiration of the sentence you are now
serving,'' said the order. The families of her schoolgirl victims are
delighted with the result, according to Tim Danson, their lawyer.
According
to the board report, the gravity of her crimes is part of the reason
she was detained. ''The judge described those acts as monstrous and
depraved,'' said the report. ''All these crimes are extremely grave the
fact that you continued your crimes after the death of your sister,
which occurred during your sexual abuse of her, demonstrates clearly
your difficulty in controlling your violent sexual impulses to the point
of putting in danger the safety of others. Your modus operandi
demonstrates a high degree of indifference to the consequences of your
acts.''
The report added that Corrections didn't know of any
surveillance program Homolka could participate in outside prison that
would sufficiently protect the public. It also noted that Homolka had
expressed worry about her own safety in the community.
Canadian
law requires that when the Correctional Service of Canada feels a case
requires detention beyond the two-thirds point, it be referred to the
board at least six months before the statutory release date. The law
also requires that the board review the case every year after the
statutory release date until the expiry of her sentence, which is in
July, 2005.
At the time of the board's announcement, Homolka said
that she wouldn't contest the ruling and indicated that she may leave
Canada after she has served her full sentence assuming that any other
country would accept her.
In January, 2003 the Toronto Star
reported that the National Parole Board had ruled that Karla Homolka
must stay in prison until her sentence is completed in July of 2005. The
board's decision represented the third time that Homolka's request to
be transferred to a half-way house was refused.
Two reasons for
the refusal were given. One reason was her sexual relationship with
another convict at the Ste.-Anne-des-Plaines detention center. The other
reason stated by the board was her refusal to participate in
rehabilitation programs. The Toronto Star reported on January 19,
2003, that "Commissioners noted she had not yet started therapy for her
role as a sexual aggressor and showed little interest in other
rehabilitation programs." Adding to the scandal, the Toronto Sun published photos it bought from Homolka's former lesbian lover when the two women were housed in a prison in Quebec.

Steve & Karlas Book

On January 20, 2003, the Globe and Mail quoted
Stephen Williams, author of two books on her case: "Is the fact that she
would like to have sex with a man supposed to predict dangerousness? It
sounds perfectly normal to me. How can that be indicative of
psychopathy or a diseased mind?"
Williams believes that the prison
system will go to any lengths to keep her in jail. Regarding the sexual
aggressor designation, he believes that it does not fit Homolka and
"she would be out of her mind to comply with this therapy."
Homolka
was transferred to a Saskatchewan prison so that she could be evaluated
by psychiatrists an evaluation which apparently was used as a factor
in denying her parole.
By doing so, Williams claims that the
correctional system has created for itself the worst possible scenario:
"Ms. Homolka's release in 2005 with no possibility of parole officers
keeping tabs on her."
On January 23, the Ottawa Citizen
reported that 10 weeks after the Ontario attorney general asked the
Niagara police to determine whether or not Homolka's involvement with
Williams' French-language best-seller "Karla, le pacte avec le diable"
(Karla: A Pact with the Devil) violated her plea bargain, the police had
not yet read the book. The police claim that the book is still in the
process of being translated.
Williams and Homolka's book was
originally written in English, but was refused by English-language
publishers, so it was translated into French after a publisher in Quebec
purchased the rights. It sold 15,000 copies in first three months.
The July, 2005 release date for Karla is still in place.

Striking Out on Her Own

By Rachael BellAfter
twelve years behind bars Karla Homolka, one of Canada's most notorious
sex killers, is getting released from jail. The families of her and her
ex-husband's victims, as well as those who narrowly survived their
abuse, have long dreaded her release from prison. Many Canadians believe
that it is inevitable that she will kill again.

Premier Dalton McGuinty

However, Karla's attorneys and some psychologists
staunchly disagree that she poses a danger to society, suggesting that
her murderous rampage was a reaction to the spousal abuse from Paul
Bernardo. Conversely, the tapes of the rapes and murders released after
her plea bargain depicted a different scenario, in which she appeared as
if she was a willing and equal accomplice in the crimes.Her release in early July, 2005, has outraged
many Canadian citizens who demanded that restriction be placed on
Karla's freedom. Consequently, the Ontario government called for a
hearing into the matter in an effort to reduce the risk of her
committing another crime. AP Worldstream quoted Ontario Premier Dalton
McGuinty saying, "people are very concerned about what she might do
again and we have a responsibility to protect the public interest."Karla
made her first public appearance in twelve years at Quebec Superior
Court in Joilette on June 2, 2005. During the court proceedings,
prosecutors tried to prove that Karla continued to pose a danger to the
public and specifically asked that her movements be closely monitored
following her release. They also wanted the court to order Karla to
submit to a DNA test, so that her genetic samples could be kept on file
in a criminal database, according to AP Worldstream.

Judge Jean Beaulieu

During the proceedings Superior Court Judge Jean
Beaulieu sided with the prosecution and ordered Karla's movements to be
heavily limited. Karla will now have to continually inform the police of
her whereabouts, undergo psychological therapy, refrain from contacting
any of the victims' family members or her ex-husband and she will not
be allowed to work with children under the age of 16, Phil Couvrette
reported for AP Online.Karla was likely displeased
with the restrictions placed on her freedom, especially since they went
against the original plea bargain. Nonetheless, she still fared better
than her ex-husband, Paul Bernardo, who will remain behind bars for the
rest of his life. In the meantime, she makes plans for the immediate
future.

Artist's sketch of Karla Homolka's new look.

In preparation for her new life, Karla has adopted a new
identity. She changed her name to Karla Teale, cut her hair, dyed it
black and even lost weight, AP Worldstream reported. Her father, Karel
Homolka, said in an AP Worldstream article that she doesn't plan to move
back to her hometown of St. Catharines but will instead "live in an
apartment in west-end Montreal's Notre-Dame-de-Grace neighborhood, in
the heart of the Anglophone community." Yet, many residents there don't
welcome the idea of her settling in their neighborhood. It's no
surprise, considering the viciousness of her past crimes.

Fighting for Her Freedom

The restrictions placed on Karla Homolka to ensure the
public safety were called unconstitutional by her lawyers when they
filed a brief on July 5, 2005 trying to get all of the restrictions
dropped.Her chances were not enhanced when her ex-husband, Paul Bernardo, claimed it was Karla who killed the two schoolgirls.The Globe and Mailreported that police are not taking any special security measures to track Homolka, although they are aware of her whereabouts.CNEWS
wrote that Homolka's "first days of freedom have been spent holed up in
an apartment amid fears that media outlets will report on her
whereabouts.""She can't leave the apartment because its too dangerous right now for her," lawyer Christian Lachance said.
Karla
Homolka went on TV just before her release expressing remorse for what
she had done with Paul Bernardo. It's doubtful that the public is buying
it though.

Hollywood Exploits Karla's Crimes

The Montreal World Film Festival has become the center of
controversy with its plan to screen a film based on the crimes of Karla
Homolka and Paul Bernardo. The film festival begins August 26 and ends
Sept 5. The Hollywood movie, produced by Michael Sellers, stars Laura
Prepon as Karla Homolka and Misha Collins as Paul Bernardo.

Laura Prepon as Karla Homolka and Misha Collins as Paul Bernardo

Tim Danson, lawyer for families of Homolka's and Bernardo's victims calls the decision to screen the film Karla
extremely "sensational and exploitive." Guy Dixon of the Globe and Mail
wrote July 27, 2005, that Danson "may take legal action under Canadian
child pornography laws...if [the film] depicts too graphically the
sexual abuse, nudity and torture of the underage victims.

Lawyer Tim Danson

Greg Bonnell of Canadian Press reported the Sellers had
offered the families an "exclusive screening" in Toronto. Sellers told
Bonnell that he had spent months consulting with Danson."We just don't feel that we've, in any way, defamed the memory of these people," Sellers said.

Producer Michael Sellers

Sellers told Guy Dixon that the film's re-enactments of
the crimes were from Karla's perspective and that "the camera pans away
from graphic, sexual violence...although the violence is heard on the
soundtrack."The film centers on Karla Homolka's
sessions with a psychiatrist during which Karla allegedly portrays
herself as a victim, while the psychiatrist questions that account.

Serge Losique

Serge Losique, the president of the Montreal festival, told Dixon that "the film was chosen solely on its artistic merit.

Why Karla?

By Katherine RamslandKarla Homolka was released from a Canadian prison in July 2005, and the media held a "Karla watch" in anticipation.�
What they thought might happen is anyone's guess, but they were correct
in believing that their audience wanted to follow every second of her
first moments of freedom.� Some hate her, some support her, and others are merely curious.Karla is just one of a number of females who have participated in killing teams, so what makes her special?�
Some experts have called her a compliant victim of abuse, and yet
there's something about her participation in certain acts and her
manipulation of the system that makes that analysis less than
satisfying.� As a result, other experts have referred to
her as a prime example of a female psychopath, which would account for
her ability to dupe the system.� It also accounts for the
widespread fascination: Psychopaths who egregiously defy social morality
are considered larger than life, so given the perceptions about Karla,
it's no surprise that she garners full-page newspaper spreads, radio and
television shows, at least one book, and two movies devoted to her.� Despite her partner's obvious deviance, she's the one people want to try to understand.� Clearly, she's attractive, and that's a factor, but there's certainly much more.To briefly review, Karla Homolka met Paul Bernardo in 1987 and began a torrid romance.� Shewas 17, Paul, 23.� To friends they seemed the perfect couple, although Paul was secretly raping women in Scarborough.� Karla was a seemingly simple, middle-class girl who found herself attracted to a sexual sadist.� She let him do whatever he desired and by some published reports, his demands became increasingly brutal.� Nevertheless, she supposedly invited more.�Six monthsprior to their storybook wedding in 1991, Karla offered Paul her 15-year-old sister, Tammy, as a Christmas gift.�
She'd drugged the girl with a tranquilizer from the vet's office where
she worked so Paul could rape her while she was presumably passed out
from alcohol consumption.� Instead, Tammy died, and it was ruled accidental.�
The two got away with it, and then took videos of themselves with Karla
wearing Tammy's clothing and pretending to be her virginal sister.�At no point did she protest and in fact seemed amused an indication that she felt no remorse.After the two bought a house, Paul brought home two girls, Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French.� Both were held captive, terrorized, abused, raped, and finally killed.� Paul took videotapes of most of these acts.�
It later turned out that Karla had lured Kristen French to the car to
kidnap, because, as she later put it, Paul liked young girls and she
wanted to keep him happy.� She had also assisted in dismembering and getting rid of Mahaffy's body.Females who kill in association with adult males usually follow the male's lead - behavior derived from his dark fantasies.� The female is usually sufficiently dependent on him to remain passive, and she may fear being abandoned or beaten.� Most have longstanding insecurity and are poorly educated.� Many were abused during childhood and during the relationship became isolated from friends and family.But in Karla's case, none of this is true.� She was confident, educated, and had a good support system with her family.� Paul even lived with them at one time.�
If Stephen Williams' accounts in two books are to be believed, Karla
was clearly co-equal in the violence, rather than passive, and even
suggested some of it herself.Paul also beat Karla at times, so she finally left in 1993.� When the police began asking questions, Karla quickly made a deal.�
She offered details about what Paul had done to the two girls in
exchange for two ten-year terms for manslaughter, to be served
concurrently.� Two more years were added after videotapes were uncovered and authorities realized her role in her sister's death.Little
research has been done on the remorseless female who uses a man to act
out her desire for violence, but this could be a case in which such a
dynamic occurred.� That Karla could kill her sister and
then continue to stay with her co-killer, participating in more rapes
and murders, signals a deviant personality.� She was also caught on videotape spontaneously telling Paul that she wanted to get many more young virgins for him. � Yes, it pleased him, but the phrasing sounded neither passive nor scripted.In addition, in prison, Karla appeared to thrive.�
Seven psychologists and psychiatrists examined her and agreed that she
showed the symptoms of battered spousal abuse, although some observers
believe she boned up on the syndrome via coaching and books.�
In 2001, the parole board referred to her as a psychopath
cold-blooded, manipulative offender who shows no remorse, yet she has
reportedly written a letter of apology to her family about her sister's
death and complained to psychiatrists about nightmares from her past.�
(The attorney for the other victims' families has stated that she has
never�apologized to them, which, if she were a typical 'compliant
accomplice,' she would likely have done.) And she appeared to have some
fun while incarcerated.� She got involved with a woman (who
later claimed to have been manipulated into giving her gifts), and
participated in parties and fashion shows.�Just
before Karla stepped out into society again, Judge Jean Beaulieu ruled
that she still presented a risk to society (despite psychiatric reports
that she did not), and conditions were set for her post-release
behavior.Since professional opinion is divided on
whether or Karla is a victim or a dangerous psychopath, it's not
possible to make definitive comments without resorting to "armchair
psychology."� However, ambiguity over this issue will continue to fuel the intense interest in her.�
If she's a psychopath, she's quite calculating and clever, fooling even
trained professionals, who seem to have discounted the voluntary nature
of her role in her sister's murder.� If not, then she appears to be a singularly adaptive and resilient victim of abuse.� Few have been so fortunate.�
She's divorced from Bernardo now and will probably make no contact, as
dictated by her release conditions, but one can only wonder what her
future behavior will be as "Karla Teale."� It's difficult to predict, especially since so many records about her case are sealed.� Thus, the "Karla watch" will likely continue for some time.

Curiouser and Curiouser

Recent news about Karla has an Alice and Wonderland quality.
First a hardware store manager gave Karla Homolka a job. Shortly
afterwards, he secretly tape records her and gives the tapes to police.
The tapes allegedly confirm Karla's violation of her release
restrictions. The hardware story manager has issues of his own his wife
has recently charged him with sexual assault and he has a criminal
record. Karla gets a call from a Quebec justice minister who interviews
her on the hardware store manager's allegations. Suddenly during the
interview, she finds out she has been duped by two radio talk show
hosts. Karla quits her job, runs from her apartment and finds a new safe
house.The Karla Homolka Media Circus is back in town after a very short hiatus.About
the third week in August, 2005, Karla had been discovered living in
run-down apartment provided by a benefactor and working as a clerk in a
Rona, Inc. hardware store in the Longueuil district, a Montreal suburb.
Some of the discovery mania was fueled by the media and some was fuel by
genuine concern about having a notorious serial killer and child
molester in one's neighborhood. Once the media knew where she worked,
they followed her and secretly photographed her with her dog.It
appears as though Karla genuinely wanted to live and work discreetly:
she dyed her hair, wore large sunglasses and avoided places where she
would be recognized. Her puppy helped focus attention away from her onto
her pet. It is not clear at this time how she spent her free time. In
the vacuum about what Karla really did and thought, her boss, the
hardware store manager, has dominated the media with his allegations
about illegal activities and strange behavior. Before one swallows his
allegations whole, it is useful to understand that his behavior is
unusual and his motives unclear.

Richer Lapointe

Richer Lapointe

Richer Lapointe, 39, is best described as an unusual
guy, and the Canadian press has displayed his eccentricities in high
relief.Lapointe was badly burned as a youngster and retains the disfiguring scars to this day.�
The accident and its result had a very negative impact on his
self-esteem. He claims that he got a second chance and he enjoys helping
other people turn their lives around. Lapointe says that he has helped
several people put their lives back together after they got out of
prison.� This is what he says motivated him to repeatedly
contact Karla Homolka's lawyer (some press accounts say five times; some
say over twenty times) with an offer for her to work in his store after
her release from prison.Richer Lapointe owns or
once owned stock in the home-improvement giant Rona, Inc. Media accounts
say that various family members still own significant amounts of Rona
stock, possibly even a controlling interest.� However, the store that Richer Lapointe managed in Longueuil was small and cramped not one of Rona's premiere retail outlets.Despite
several scrapes with the law, police permitted Lapointe to hire Karla
Homolka as a clerk trainee. She started the job in early August. Shortly
after she began work, Lapointe was charged with assaulting his former
wife and trespassing on her property. After these charges were made
against Lapointe, Karla was told by police that he was not a suitable
employer. She quit the next day. Lapointe is under a court order not to
leave Quebec.As if this were not enough to catapult
Lapointe into the media spotlight, he then claimed that he had taped
Karla Homolka discussing how she had breached her conditions of release
from prison.The media firestorm that ensued caused
Rona, Inc. to decide to close the store that Lapointe managed. The
publicity was just too much of a liability. Rona wanted to distance
itself from the entire situation.

Allegations

One of the conditions of Karla Homolka's release was that she was not to consort with criminals.� Another condition was that she was not to be in any position of authority with children under the age of 16.Richer
Lapointe claims that Karla cooked meals for her boyfriend Jean-Paul
Gerbert, a convicted murderer who is in prison for the 1998 murder of
his girlfriend Cathy Carretta. Gerbert is serving his sentence at the
Laval Correctional Institute.A spokesperson for the Laval prison says that it is not possible to bring food into the prison.Another
allegation from Lapointe was that Karla was trying to help the troubled
son of her lesbian lover, Stivia Clermont, a convicted murderer.The
final allegation made against Karla was that she agreed to watch
Lapointe's two sons, age 9 and 14, for an hour or so and never informed
him that she was violating her release restrictions.One
has to wonder about entrapment. Are these alleged violations of Karla's
release restrictions, even if they are proven, really that severe?� Lapointe's motivations when he fought so hard to employ her are controversial.